I don't think i accused you of wanting to penalize success. It certainly is a democrat position where they publicly admit wanting to tax people who earn more at higher rates.
Those record profits you are talking of are largely due to restructuring and layoffs. Like I said, salaries is the place that gets cut.
You spew about externalities is a load of crap also. They are covered by the populations taking the cheaper products. Most of them are completely arbitrary depending on what nut case you want to listen to. They will still be palmed off on the middle and lower class populations if they were internalized because businesses need to make more money then they spend which means only that costs will increase and the population will either have to pay that increased costs or go without.
I do agree that regulation does need to exist and I do agree that it needs to be simpler and easier to understand. WE can have a book of 500 pages of regulation and it won't mean a thing if it doesn't correctly address what it intends to address. Instead of lots of regulations, we need a few well written regulations.
I also agree with the attempts at creating barriers to entry for competitors. This alone should be reason enough to get the old ones out and effective ones in place.
Jesus fuck dude.. who cares? Are you retarded or something, I said nothing about the republican party or republican presidents so stop creating fallacies with them as if they pertain to me.
Fuck dude, just do a damn google search for the information. This isn't anything new and it isn't anything denied by the scientists involved. the data lost is raw data, it is different then the data being used in the studies because part of the process is actually manipulating the data in a process called normalizing it. What is lost is what data was actually used from the source data and how it went from raw data to a normalized set that can be useful. A Programmer at CRU attempted to recreate it and gave up in frustration claiming it was impossible.
You are right, there are other data sets available and as I already said, using those sets can not be used to verify the CRU data as they all reproduce difference points in their results. The CRU data is important because it is behind 90% of everything the IPCC used in its analysis. It will take years before enough data it collected to be directly applied against the CRU data.
I know you think of yourself as some appointed defender of the faith when it comes to global warming, but I think maybe you should stop and learn a little about what you think you know before making such an ass of yourself.
This became political when James Hansen and democrat staffers colluded to turn off the AC in congress on one of the hottest days on record just so Hansen could create an impact over his claims of global warming in 1988. Hansen and the democrat staffers were both hostile over the discontinuation of the alternative energy research from the 1970's oil embargo.
Actually, he is right to a degree. The raw data to a lot of the base studies which is primarily used for all global warming research was deleted which created a firestorm because it was the subject of numerous FOI requests. The raw data is manipulated on purpose to normalize the output into something useful. This manipulation process is missing too.
What the op is referring to is this and how it is impossible to recreate the raw numbers and check the normalization processes. No other data set can prove or disprove the original or even the studies created from it and studies that were built on it because they simply won't match. The concealment of this and denial to release it lasted so long that the majority of the IPCC work done is based around studies that reference the results of that data and process.
I disagree with the op's position though as eventually, even with faulty starting or reference data, the theory can be supported or proven wrong. It will take a large amount of time to collect enough contrasting data to get something useful though.
You mean in those countries who are forcing austerity measures onto others so the Euro doesn't collapse? Or those countries that are in a deeper recession then we are right now?
You are delusional. There are no lies about a limited role of the federal government. There might people people lieing by claiming to believe the same and doing the opposite or something else altogether once elected, but you seem to have the cause and effect backwards. Those people would be lieing because there is a significant portion of the population that believes that way, not because some rock star senator amassed a following and uttered it one night.
As for the libertarian leaning, I believe I covered that as well as the dysfunction of the party by saying libertarian/republican mindset originally. As I said, I'm talking about the gun owners, not the parties.
Riches is a subjective word to begin with. There are a lot more rags to riches stories then you think when you consider what is relatively rich to the person. Millions of people are born into welfare roles who through the existing education system end up either building their own mini empire or bettering their lifestyle to a point of having savings, investments, a home, and so on. People are able to do better then their parents were doing within the current education system. Sure there are people who are limited because they do not have access to funding or because they shine in areas of skill there are no demands for in their areas, but that is not a problem with the current education system- unless you somehow think schools are supposed to provide opportunities also or something.
As for the big two, listen, not penalizing success does not create a situation of only supporting those at the top. I can show you studies that prove we never landed men on the moon too, but I give them about as much credit as the studies saying one political party is for the rich and the other is for the poor. Wealth will gravitate towards the top simply because the top consistently take in more then they spend.Those at the top do not sit on that money or bury it in the back yard, they invest it and thereby create more wealth or put it into a bank who does the loans it to others who do the same. That is simply how the world works. Every barrier we put in place on that happening will mean a barrier for those on the bottom trying to make it to the top. It slows the economy and drive the costs of doing business up which means lower salaries to compensate.
This can be seen in action right now. There are some major factors in the costs of doing business. They can be described as raw material costs, energy costs, labor costs, and regulatory costs which would include taxes. When you increase taxes, you increase raw material and energy costs, when you increase regulation, you increase regulatory costs, and what is left, salaries. We are in a recession (some say a depression). Yet we got the EPA increasing regulatory costs and energy costs which also increases raw material costs. We got the government threatening to increase taxes which further increases those costs, and people are wondering why we aren't seeing jobs being created at a scale needed to pull us out of the recession. It's because all the excess money is going into a black hole.
Cheap energy and/or Cheap raw materials has always been the key hallmark of any period of economic boom. It certainly was a key during the Clinton boom where we had Cheap energy (oil, gas, electricity and Coal), we had China dumping cheap steal on the market that forced a lot of US steal manufacturing out of business, we had Canada undercutting US lumber with subsidized lumber. If you have that cheap energy and cheap materials, you can have high taxes without much problems, you can have high salaries without much problems. When you do not have that, you need to have lower taxes or lower salaries or both. The alternative to this is a price point for the products or services that end up slowing sales to a point where less of each is needed which means unemployment because less sales are being made and growing national debt because less tax revenue is being brought in.
That isn't universal and is dumb'd down a lot but it is largely true. There certainly are areas of the economy that will thrive regardless like bankruptcy law, debt consolidation services and some areas that we cannot live without or a without a minimum level of like health care and food.
Dude, I was talking about the people, not the party. If there ever was an Arab Spring in the US where the sitting government was overthrown, the whiners about education and the government not giving them enough crowd will not be the ones to rebuild the government. Those people will probably wish for the old government back because the gun owners typically see no fundamental problem with the government as it is envisioned by the founders, just as the government in practice who ignores the constitution instead of amending it.
docking with other objects wouldn't be a problem with the imperial/metric differences. All you need to do is place an adapter over the docking port if the size differences are out of tolerance. We did something very similar with the space shuttle in order to dock with the Russian space station.
Everything else can be converted to or from metric as needed if ever needed.
A smart kid will become a great person in spite of being poor. That happens quite often. There are literally hundreds of thousands of scholarships looking for the one smart poor kid just to say their organization was part of making that great person. That is of course unless he ruins his chances first by joining a gang or by committing some offensive crime or wasting his education opportunities.
If you think the Arab Spring is coming to the US, the outcome will not be as you want. In the US, we are allowed to keep guns. Most people who do so are of the libertarian/republican mindset that think the federal government is limited in it's powers. The people who think like you tend to hide from guns and weapons and will be vastly outnumbered.
Fairness has little to do with it either. Life simply is not fair. But we have this ability to make the best of the situations we find ourselves in.
Crap like this always amuses me. Businesses are not entitled to exist, they do so because they create a value that is then sold to people who want or need that value and they have to accomplish this at a profit else they go bankrupt. The more you raise the costs of doing business, the more you force these companies to either cut costs (usually employee salaries are the easiest) or raise the costs of the product or services they offer.
Your entire idea is the very reason why corporations are the way they are right now.
There are simply too many examples of people going from nothing to something and becoming rich to make your view remotely valid. Some people's capacity isn't much more then working for someone else and some people's desire doesn't extend past that. There is where you are making your first mistake.
The raw truth of the matter is that people mess their lives up well before they can get a job. This is especially true in poorer areas where parents tend to lack parenting skills or even parents and the child gets trapped into gangs, drugs, violence, crimes, and so on. This also happens in more affluent communities too, but not to the same degree.
The republicans, as well as the democrats have no way of controlling that and your disdain for one is only a symptom of ignorance. The republicans have always been pro education, they just do not think the way the democrats seem to want to do things work. Take the NCLBA for instance. It said we are going to end the days of skipping over children's education and that teachers and schools, the very same people who claim to be able to get kids to learn and take jobs doing so, will have to find ways to teach kids or find new jobs. It was met with fierce opposition "how dare you expect teachers to teach every student under their charge". They specifically despised the alternative school provisions "how dare you give students of failing schools the ability to go to better performing schools so they can receive a quality education".
To blame any of you just said you thought was wrong on one party is only asking for more. Of course then again, ignorance is sometimes comforting. I guess you can always get satisfaction by getting more mad at republicans when democrat policies do the same.
You do know that Rosa Parks was a secretary for the NAACP at the time she pulled her move on the bus right? Saying "She did not know nor could she have known" is kind of a stretch.
Imagine if the bus driver didn't like driving on the right hand side of the road and all the sudden started driving on the left. It may not have matter where Ms Parks sat.
Its probably got the weight down to something reasonably comparable too. After reading through to specs, they seem to have a lot of hardware features with some power behind it too. If a power strip/ surge protector weighs as much as a battery backup, someone is going to ask some questions.
sadly, ignorance and political bias seems to be the exception to that rule at times. All throughout history, people have been trying to pound some sense into both categories and generally failed.
Today might have been better served as the recent past.
Tea party candidates ran under the Republican party but that doesn't automatically make them republican. That's why they are called tea party republicans. Either way, they do, even the tea party republicans, seem to follow the leader in lock step opposition to some of the democrats policies.
I also like you have turned this into an ad hominen attack. Are you scared you are losing the argument or something? Perhaps it is you who is all butt hurt over Reagan's cuts in education increases which would explain why you are resorting to these measures.
BTW, the decline in America's education quality can be traced largely back to the creation of the Department of education under the federal government who's marching mantra seems to be throw more money at doing the same things with diminishing results. Of course it's mission was a little different back then than it is now. The federal government should never be involved in education as it is a state and local responsibility with decisions and results determined within that arena.
It was Nixon's policy. I find nothing that indicates it was a republican policy other then Nixon having it. Republicans were not some lock step army like they seem to be today back when Nixon was president.
Either way, it was failed policy. Policy that went no where but out of the mouth of one guy. Is it really fair to claim democrats want to nationalize the entire medical profession because Hillary Clinton did in 1993? No, because even when it came down to it, not all democrats supported it and it was a failed policy.
Bringing up Nixon's failed policy is about as ingenuous as saying Iraq and Afghanistan should be supported by democrats because Truman got us involved in 1950 and JFK took us from an advisory role in Vietnam to an active military role with the tripling of troop strength and direct involvement in field operations so it is the same policies. It is a non sequitur and just doesn't work.
USB will be still around simply because we have not saturated the bus. IDE, VGA, the various Tape Technologies and rs232 all had their limits saturated and surpassed by the replacement technologies. USB will have a few revisions still before it becomes obsolete and replaced. I guess the bigger question might be if the standard will remain backwards compatible with the now at least 25 years old standard or if the operating systems will still have compatible drivers.
Slashdot Mirror
And as I said, google it. It isn't a big fucking secret.
Or sit there in denial and wonder why you have to go around defending something that you cannot understand due to lack of complete information.
I don't think i accused you of wanting to penalize success. It certainly is a democrat position where they publicly admit wanting to tax people who earn more at higher rates.
Those record profits you are talking of are largely due to restructuring and layoffs. Like I said, salaries is the place that gets cut.
You spew about externalities is a load of crap also. They are covered by the populations taking the cheaper products. Most of them are completely arbitrary depending on what nut case you want to listen to. They will still be palmed off on the middle and lower class populations if they were internalized because businesses need to make more money then they spend which means only that costs will increase and the population will either have to pay that increased costs or go without.
I do agree that regulation does need to exist and I do agree that it needs to be simpler and easier to understand. WE can have a book of 500 pages of regulation and it won't mean a thing if it doesn't correctly address what it intends to address. Instead of lots of regulations, we need a few well written regulations.
I also agree with the attempts at creating barriers to entry for competitors. This alone should be reason enough to get the old ones out and effective ones in place.
Jesus fuck dude.. who cares? Are you retarded or something, I said nothing about the republican party or republican presidents so stop creating fallacies with them as if they pertain to me.
Fuck dude, just do a damn google search for the information. This isn't anything new and it isn't anything denied by the scientists involved. the data lost is raw data, it is different then the data being used in the studies because part of the process is actually manipulating the data in a process called normalizing it. What is lost is what data was actually used from the source data and how it went from raw data to a normalized set that can be useful. A Programmer at CRU attempted to recreate it and gave up in frustration claiming it was impossible.
You are right, there are other data sets available and as I already said, using those sets can not be used to verify the CRU data as they all reproduce difference points in their results. The CRU data is important because it is behind 90% of everything the IPCC used in its analysis. It will take years before enough data it collected to be directly applied against the CRU data.
I know you think of yourself as some appointed defender of the faith when it comes to global warming, but I think maybe you should stop and learn a little about what you think you know before making such an ass of yourself.
This became political when James Hansen and democrat staffers colluded to turn off the AC in congress on one of the hottest days on record just so Hansen could create an impact over his claims of global warming in 1988. Hansen and the democrat staffers were both hostile over the discontinuation of the alternative energy research from the 1970's oil embargo.
But it was the first second post?
Actually, he is right to a degree. The raw data to a lot of the base studies which is primarily used for all global warming research was deleted which created a firestorm because it was the subject of numerous FOI requests. The raw data is manipulated on purpose to normalize the output into something useful. This manipulation process is missing too.
What the op is referring to is this and how it is impossible to recreate the raw numbers and check the normalization processes. No other data set can prove or disprove the original or even the studies created from it and studies that were built on it because they simply won't match. The concealment of this and denial to release it lasted so long that the majority of the IPCC work done is based around studies that reference the results of that data and process.
I disagree with the op's position though as eventually, even with faulty starting or reference data, the theory can be supported or proven wrong. It will take a large amount of time to collect enough contrasting data to get something useful though.
You mean in those countries who are forcing austerity measures onto others so the Euro doesn't collapse? Or those countries that are in a deeper recession then we are right now?
You are delusional. There are no lies about a limited role of the federal government. There might people people lieing by claiming to believe the same and doing the opposite or something else altogether once elected, but you seem to have the cause and effect backwards. Those people would be lieing because there is a significant portion of the population that believes that way, not because some rock star senator amassed a following and uttered it one night.
As for the libertarian leaning, I believe I covered that as well as the dysfunction of the party by saying libertarian/republican mindset originally. As I said, I'm talking about the gun owners, not the parties.
Riches is a subjective word to begin with. There are a lot more rags to riches stories then you think when you consider what is relatively rich to the person. Millions of people are born into welfare roles who through the existing education system end up either building their own mini empire or bettering their lifestyle to a point of having savings, investments, a home, and so on. People are able to do better then their parents were doing within the current education system. Sure there are people who are limited because they do not have access to funding or because they shine in areas of skill there are no demands for in their areas, but that is not a problem with the current education system- unless you somehow think schools are supposed to provide opportunities also or something.
As for the big two, listen, not penalizing success does not create a situation of only supporting those at the top. I can show you studies that prove we never landed men on the moon too, but I give them about as much credit as the studies saying one political party is for the rich and the other is for the poor. Wealth will gravitate towards the top simply because the top consistently take in more then they spend.Those at the top do not sit on that money or bury it in the back yard, they invest it and thereby create more wealth or put it into a bank who does the loans it to others who do the same. That is simply how the world works. Every barrier we put in place on that happening will mean a barrier for those on the bottom trying to make it to the top. It slows the economy and drive the costs of doing business up which means lower salaries to compensate.
This can be seen in action right now. There are some major factors in the costs of doing business. They can be described as raw material costs, energy costs, labor costs, and regulatory costs which would include taxes. When you increase taxes, you increase raw material and energy costs, when you increase regulation, you increase regulatory costs, and what is left, salaries. We are in a recession (some say a depression). Yet we got the EPA increasing regulatory costs and energy costs which also increases raw material costs. We got the government threatening to increase taxes which further increases those costs, and people are wondering why we aren't seeing jobs being created at a scale needed to pull us out of the recession. It's because all the excess money is going into a black hole.
Cheap energy and/or Cheap raw materials has always been the key hallmark of any period of economic boom. It certainly was a key during the Clinton boom where we had Cheap energy (oil, gas, electricity and Coal), we had China dumping cheap steal on the market that forced a lot of US steal manufacturing out of business, we had Canada undercutting US lumber with subsidized lumber. If you have that cheap energy and cheap materials, you can have high taxes without much problems, you can have high salaries without much problems. When you do not have that, you need to have lower taxes or lower salaries or both. The alternative to this is a price point for the products or services that end up slowing sales to a point where less of each is needed which means unemployment because less sales are being made and growing national debt because less tax revenue is being brought in.
That isn't universal and is dumb'd down a lot but it is largely true. There certainly are areas of the economy that will thrive regardless like bankruptcy law, debt consolidation services and some areas that we cannot live without or a without a minimum level of like health care and food.
Dude, I was talking about the people, not the party. If there ever was an Arab Spring in the US where the sitting government was overthrown, the whiners about education and the government not giving them enough crowd will not be the ones to rebuild the government. Those people will probably wish for the old government back because the gun owners typically see no fundamental problem with the government as it is envisioned by the founders, just as the government in practice who ignores the constitution instead of amending it.
docking with other objects wouldn't be a problem with the imperial/metric differences. All you need to do is place an adapter over the docking port if the size differences are out of tolerance. We did something very similar with the space shuttle in order to dock with the Russian space station.
Everything else can be converted to or from metric as needed if ever needed.
A smart kid will become a great person in spite of being poor. That happens quite often. There are literally hundreds of thousands of scholarships looking for the one smart poor kid just to say their organization was part of making that great person. That is of course unless he ruins his chances first by joining a gang or by committing some offensive crime or wasting his education opportunities.
If you think the Arab Spring is coming to the US, the outcome will not be as you want. In the US, we are allowed to keep guns. Most people who do so are of the libertarian/republican mindset that think the federal government is limited in it's powers. The people who think like you tend to hide from guns and weapons and will be vastly outnumbered.
Fairness has little to do with it either. Life simply is not fair. But we have this ability to make the best of the situations we find ourselves in.
Crap like this always amuses me. Businesses are not entitled to exist, they do so because they create a value that is then sold to people who want or need that value and they have to accomplish this at a profit else they go bankrupt. The more you raise the costs of doing business, the more you force these companies to either cut costs (usually employee salaries are the easiest) or raise the costs of the product or services they offer.
Your entire idea is the very reason why corporations are the way they are right now.
There are simply too many examples of people going from nothing to something and becoming rich to make your view remotely valid. Some people's capacity isn't much more then working for someone else and some people's desire doesn't extend past that. There is where you are making your first mistake.
The raw truth of the matter is that people mess their lives up well before they can get a job. This is especially true in poorer areas where parents tend to lack parenting skills or even parents and the child gets trapped into gangs, drugs, violence, crimes, and so on. This also happens in more affluent communities too, but not to the same degree.
The republicans, as well as the democrats have no way of controlling that and your disdain for one is only a symptom of ignorance. The republicans have always been pro education, they just do not think the way the democrats seem to want to do things work. Take the NCLBA for instance. It said we are going to end the days of skipping over children's education and that teachers and schools, the very same people who claim to be able to get kids to learn and take jobs doing so, will have to find ways to teach kids or find new jobs. It was met with fierce opposition "how dare you expect teachers to teach every student under their charge". They specifically despised the alternative school provisions "how dare you give students of failing schools the ability to go to better performing schools so they can receive a quality education".
Yet Obama came to power and repackaged the same old shit and called it a gem while speaking kindly of it.
To blame any of you just said you thought was wrong on one party is only asking for more. Of course then again, ignorance is sometimes comforting. I guess you can always get satisfaction by getting more mad at republicans when democrat policies do the same.
You do know that Rosa Parks was a secretary for the NAACP at the time she pulled her move on the bus right? Saying "She did not know nor could she have known" is kind of a stretch.
Exactly.
Imagine if the bus driver didn't like driving on the right hand side of the road and all the sudden started driving on the left. It may not have matter where Ms Parks sat.
You do realize that the US, EU, Japan, Brazil and several other countries also have different pin configurations too right?
It is probably just a matter of country specific housing covers that hold the outlets..
It says 120 or 240 volt. I guess the selection is made during checkout.
Its probably got the weight down to something reasonably comparable too. After reading through to specs, they seem to have a lot of hardware features with some power behind it too. If a power strip/ surge protector weighs as much as a battery backup, someone is going to ask some questions.
sadly, ignorance and political bias seems to be the exception to that rule at times. All throughout history, people have been trying to pound some sense into both categories and generally failed.
Today might have been better served as the recent past.
Tea party candidates ran under the Republican party but that doesn't automatically make them republican. That's why they are called tea party republicans. Either way, they do, even the tea party republicans, seem to follow the leader in lock step opposition to some of the democrats policies.
I also like you have turned this into an ad hominen attack. Are you scared you are losing the argument or something? Perhaps it is you who is all butt hurt over Reagan's cuts in education increases which would explain why you are resorting to these measures.
BTW, the decline in America's education quality can be traced largely back to the creation of the Department of education under the federal government who's marching mantra seems to be throw more money at doing the same things with diminishing results. Of course it's mission was a little different back then than it is now. The federal government should never be involved in education as it is a state and local responsibility with decisions and results determined within that arena.
It was Nixon's policy. I find nothing that indicates it was a republican policy other then Nixon having it. Republicans were not some lock step army like they seem to be today back when Nixon was president.
Either way, it was failed policy. Policy that went no where but out of the mouth of one guy. Is it really fair to claim democrats want to nationalize the entire medical profession because Hillary Clinton did in 1993? No, because even when it came down to it, not all democrats supported it and it was a failed policy.
Bringing up Nixon's failed policy is about as ingenuous as saying Iraq and Afghanistan should be supported by democrats because Truman got us involved in 1950 and JFK took us from an advisory role in Vietnam to an active military role with the tripling of troop strength and direct involvement in field operations so it is the same policies. It is a non sequitur and just doesn't work.
USB will be still around simply because we have not saturated the bus. IDE, VGA, the various Tape Technologies and rs232 all had their limits saturated and surpassed by the replacement technologies. USB will have a few revisions still before it becomes obsolete and replaced. I guess the bigger question might be if the standard will remain backwards compatible with the now at least 25 years old standard or if the operating systems will still have compatible drivers.
And yet both plans were still rejected. You might even say tossed out and forgotten as soon as the HMO act was passed.